test-drb

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

101090 discussions

by dwollmann＠ibmhelp.com

Since there was talk here in the recent past of reviving one of these. I found the following on comp.sys.ibm.sys3x.misc: > I have about 40 logic cards, all the power supplies and an 8 inch floppy > drive from a > System/34. All are for sale for best offer. Could supply list of numbers > if interested. > > Norm Helmkay helmkay(a)ibm.net Don't reply to me, I'm just an innocent bystander. -- David Wollmann dwollmann(a)ibmhelp.com

28 years, 3 months

Original IBM PC (was Re: Prices to pay for old

by Marty＠itgonline.com

Are you saying that the original 16KB 5150 had four rows of 4KB dips? ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Re: Original IBM PC (was Re: Prices to pay for old Author: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu at internet Date: 5/22/98 3:17 PM At 11:11 5/22/98 -0700, you wrote: >> Of the 16K-64K mb's there are reputed to have been two distinct series, >> called "Series 0" and "Series 1." A 16K, > >What distinguishes the two series? As noted, I don't know. I'm hoping that someone like Tony does. >I hope that "16K" means "16/64K model" as opposed to "actually equipped with >16K of memory." Your hopes are dashed. The only pricey IBM PCs are the ones that had 16K installed at the factory and weren't upgraded. The 64K ones are relatively common, although worth keeping; it's like the difference between a Lisa One and a Lisa 2. __________________________________________ Kip Crosby engine(a)chac.org http://www.chac.org/index.html Computer History Association of California ------ Message Header Follows ------ Received: from lists3.u.washington.edu by smtp.itgonline.com (PostalUnion/SMTP(tm) v2.1.9i(b5) for Windows NT(tm)) id AA-1998May22.151747.1767.43132; Fri, 22 May 1998 15:17:48 -0400 Received: from host (lists.u.washington.edu [140.142.56.13]) by lists3.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.05) with SMTP id MAA01354; Fri, 22 May 1998 12:09:17 -0700 Received: from mxu1.u.washington.edu (mxu1.u.washington.edu [140.142.32.8]) by lists.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.05) with ESMTP id MAA18246 for <classiccmp(a)lists.u.washington.edu>; Fri, 22 May 1998 12:09:12 -0700 Received: from relay.batnet.com (relay1.batnet.com [204.188.144.18]) by mxu1.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.09) with SMTP id MAA25664 for <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>; Fri, 22 May 1998 12:09:11 -0700 Received: from goldrush by relay.batnet.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id MAA03963; Fri, 22 May 1998 12:08:41 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980522120840.00e606b0(a)pop.batnet.com> Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 12:08:40 -0700 Reply-To: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu Sender: CLASSICCMP-owner(a)u.washington.edu Precedence: bulk From: Kip Crosby <engine(a)chac.org> To: "Discussion re-collecting of classic computers" <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Subject: Re: Original IBM PC (was Re: Prices to pay for old computers...) In-Reply-To: <199805221811.LAA28289(a)saul5.u.washington.edu> References: <3.0.5.32.19980522080349.00f4dc70(a)pop.batnet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: chac(a)pop.batnet.com X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 beta -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN

28 years, 3 months

Original IBM PC (was Re: Prices to pay for old computers

by Marty＠itgonline.com

I have a 16KB-64KB 5150, it has one row of 16KB dips soldered in place with three rows of 16KB dips socketed. Pull the three rows of socketed 16KB dips and it's a 16KB 5150 equipped with 16KB of soldered in memory. ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Original IBM PC (was Re: Prices to pay for old computers...) Author: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu at internet Date: 5/22/98 2:18 PM > Of the 16K-64K mb's there are reputed to have been two distinct series, > called "Series 0" and "Series 1." A 16K, What distinguishes the two series? I hope that "16K" means "16/64K model" as opposed to "actually equipped with 16K of memory." -- Derek ------ Message Header Follows ------ Received: from lists2.u.washington.edu by smtp.itgonline.com (PostalUnion/SMTP(tm) v2.1.9i(b5) for Windows NT(tm)) id AA-1998May22.141838.1767.43121; Fri, 22 May 1998 14:18:39 -0400 Received: from host (lists.u.washington.edu [140.142.56.13]) by lists2.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.05) with SMTP id LAA05331; Fri, 22 May 1998 11:11:38 -0700 Received: from jason02.u.washington.edu (root(a)jason02.u.washington.edu [140.142.76.8]) by lists.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.05) with ESMTP id LAA15582 for <classiccmp(a)lists.u.washington.edu>; Fri, 22 May 1998 11:11:35 -0700 Received: from saul5.u.washington.edu (dpeschel(a)saul5.u.washington.edu [140.142.83.3]) by jason02.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.05) with ESMTP id LAA49024 for <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>; Fri, 22 May 1998 11:11:34 -0700 Received: (from dpeschel@localhost) by saul5.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.04) id LAA28289 for classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu; Fri, 22 May 1998 11:11:33 - 0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805221811.LAA28289(a)saul5.u.washington.edu> Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 11:11:33 -0700 (PDT) Reply-To: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu Sender: CLASSICCMP-owner(a)u.washington.edu Precedence: bulk From: "D. Peschel" <dpeschel(a)u.washington.edu> To: "Discussion re-collecting of classic computers" <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Subject: Original IBM PC (was Re: Prices to pay for old computers...) In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980522080349.00f4dc70(a)pop.batnet.com> from "Kip Crosby" at May 22, 98 08:03:49 am MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 beta -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN

28 years, 3 months

Finds and questions

by sinasohn＠ricochet.net

At 12:47 PM 5/21/98 -0500, you wrote: >> Nope, HMR. First off, for those not in the know, HMR is HMR USA (see <http://www.hmrusa.com/>), a "global recycler". What they do mostly is take in a *HUGE* warehouse full of older computers and ship them overseas where they'll be used. They also sell stuff to individuals on Fridays and alternate Saturdays. >I called them once to inquire about their inventory, and I got the >impression that they were asking for real money (like $100 for obsolete, >err, classic, laptops). Do they drop prices on the weekend? It's all very subjective. You go in, find what you want, ask how much, and then haggle. $100 should get you a '386 Compaq, probably with docking station. But you never know. I've walked away from stuff I really wanted because the guy said too high a price. (Like my DG-1; the first time I saw it, I think the guy said $50, the next time, I think a different guy said like $20 or so.) >> You wouldn't know what type of HD is in there, would you? > >I think they were probably using Conners. It's easy to check. Pop off the >plastic feet on the back panel to reveal two screws. Remove them, and >then pop off the lid. Cool. I'll check it out. Thanks! >BTW, Doug Coward seems to have the world's supply of T100's, but he says >they're not laptops. I always assumed the rectangle in the upper right >corner I had seen in pix was an LCD, but apparently not (is it a cartridge >slot?). Hmmm... I may still have to get one. Have take a look at a pic. --------------------------------------------------------------------- O- Uncle Roger "There is pleasure pure in being mad roger(a)sinasohn.com that none but madmen know." Roger Louis Sinasohn & Associates San Francisco, California http://www.sinasohn.com/

28 years, 3 months

Guys, calm down! Please!

by kyrrin＠jps.net

C'mon, guys... this whole MS vs. DoJ mess is turning into another list-cluttering slug-fest. Contrary to what MS would, apparently, like the world to believe, there are choices when it comes to OS's. Run what best suits your needs and desires, and don't bash others for doing the same. Caveat emptor! -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Bruce Lane, Sysop, The Dragon's Cave BBS (Fidonet 1:343/272) (Hamateur: WD6EOS) (E-mail: kyrrin(a)jps.net) "Our science can only describe an object, event, or living thing in our own human terms. It cannot, in any way, define any of them..."

28 years, 3 months

cat Xerox | Apple | Microsoft ?

by photze＠batelco.com.bh

>> Linux is free and it may be better (it's abosolute hell to install) > >I'd disagree with you on "absolute hell". It's much less difficult >than the "historical" Unices that I've installed over the years on >PDP-11's. I have a shorter time installing Linux (Red Hat 5.0) than I do Windows 95/3.1!!! It's easy, if you're like me, using standard IDE/UDMA componets, a PCI bus, etc. >The only "difficult" Linux installs that I've done were when none of >the commonly-distributed kernels had support for some particular >device necessary for system operation (i.e. some obscure SCSI >host adapter), and I had to do a kernel build on another system >for this configuration first. SCSI makes things difficult. Seriously. On this 'ere machine, the SCSI contoller makes for... a partially cooled hell for instalation. >On the other hand, many "free" Unix ports I've seen are not only >absolute hell to install, mainly because the installation instructions/ >script are badly out of sync with the distributed binaries. NetBSD-VAX >is what springs to mind at the moment! I'll have to take your word on that. But then again, the first name usually denotes a total genius!!! (Tim O'Reilly, Tim Berners-Lee...) >Of course, it depends on what you're comparing against :-). From >your other comments it sounds like your standard of reference is >probably VMS, in which case I'll agree, by comparison Linux is >absolute hell. How 'bout comparing it to... FreeDOS? (http://www.freedos.org) I BTW, support this idea entirely, as after Windows 98, MS said they arn't going to include a DOS with Windows, so you'll need a DOS if MS isn't around/making OS's. Actually, I think that MS has had a smart strategy in recent months. Internet Explorer for Solaris, NetShow for Linux... I think that it's about time that MS dropped their dead-weight which gives them little profits and focus at what they're good at: Ease of use (on dirt cheap PC's), etc. Now, I kinda like Windows, like MacOS for the rest of us. But I think that if MS focused on other things, or stopped focusing on "We're the best at everything" and started thinking "We could save money, time, and PR funds by working on other OS's"... like making a cross NT-Linux.... that'd be COOL!!! >Tim. Yep.

28 years, 3 months

North Star Help (xpost)

by rhblake＠bbtel.com

Found this on the Obsolete Computer Helpline (http://ncsc.dni.us/fun/user/tcc/cmuseum/helpline/helpline.htm) and since all the buzz about NorthStar's on here lately I figured someone might contact this person. I'm sure many of you are even nearby this guy and could easily get him what he needs. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- John Troxell <nitedriver(a)webtv.net> Vineland, NJ US - Thursday, May 21, 1998 at 12:08:26 Wanted: Boot Disk (and any other) for a Z-100 North Star Advantage. If I remember correctly these are special/different format/# of sectors than all others. Any help would be greatly appreciated. This ex-Fuzzari of all PC's is dead in water w/o it. TIA, John Troxell ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Russ Blakeman RB Custom Services / Rt. 1 Box 62E / Harned, KY USA 40144 Phone: (502) 756-1749 Data/Fax:(502) 756-6991 Email: rhblake(a)bbtel.com or rhblake(a)bigfoot.com Website: http://members.tripod.com/~RHBLAKE/ ICQ UIN #1714857 AOL Instant Messenger "RHBLAKEMAN" * Parts/Service/Upgrades and more for MOST Computers* --------------------------------------------------------------------

28 years, 3 months

Zenith 248's

by photze＠batelco.com.bh

Hi. Are these the 286's that Zenith sold by the mass-quadrillions to the US Gov't??? If so, they're pretty cool, when you get down to it. CPU's on a backplane, they had a 386 upgrade, and even a 486 one, but the 386's didn't sell, 486's were only prototypes, from what I can tell. By pressing CRL+INS you could get into this WAY COOL Apple II like ROM test program. Pleanty of RAM, etc. Trust me, I know. Every single day of the week, I USE ONE OF THESE in math class. Cool retro use, don't you agree??? It runs WP 5.1, they weren't equipped with Windows, but MS-DOS 5.0 (at least that's what I see, might have been 3.3), and some came with this cool monitor that had a Amber/Green/Normal switch, but only worked well in mono, not CGA mode. Tim D. Hotze

28 years, 3 months

cat Xerox | Apple | Microsoft ?

by rigdonj＠intellistar.net

This is too good! I just can't resist getting my two cents worth in! At 06:23 PM 5/21/98 -0700, you wrote: >Sure the DOS license was a big initial push, but to say it was solely >responsible for the success of Microsoft is like saying the Model T is >responsible for Ford having the best selling vehicle in America today. Then you had better go back and look at automotive history. Ford was just another car company among dozens, yes dozens, of similar companies until they brought out the model T. That put them in the lead and they've been there ever since. Since the model T they've bought up or plowed under most of the competion with the exception of the other major companies like GM and Chrysler. That seems to be the same strategy that MS is using. MS Hell! ALL companies do it! I used to work for Martin Marietta, look at all the competitors they've bought up in the last couple of years! > >Microsoft was a development products company, not an OS company. When I got >here in 1988, I remember seeing a revenue pie chart at the company meeting. >We were at around 60-70% revenue from development products like C++ & >FORTRAN, with a big slice from apps like Word & Multiplan, and DOS revenue >was a tiny slice. Exactly and I'm sure that Win 95 or Win 98 will also be a tiny slice. MS gives away the OS, then makes up the profit by selling you all the applications that require that OS. In a decade where everything had to be written directly >to the hardware to get any speed out of the 8088, you can hardly say that >the DOS license had much to do with the success of the dev products. > >Our first, all time most successful Windows app, Excel, that nuked the Lotus >1-2-3 monopoly through ease of use and customer demand alone, was _ported >from the Macintosh_. How exactly could we have leveraged our ownership of >Windows to make Excel successful when it wasn't even written for Windows? What do mean, wasn't written for Windows??? You certainly couldn't take a Mac disk and put it in a PC with Windows and run it! It may have ORIGINALLY been written for a Mac but it was certainly rewritten for Windows. The Windows very only looked and actly like the Mac version, the code was entirely rewritten. > >If IBM endorsing & bundling an OS makes it a monopoly, why is OS/2 dead? Because (1) MS very publicly announced that they were dropping support for it (2) MS (and others) never sold any significant application programs for it. That's exactly what a monoply is all about, the power to kill a rival product through direct action or in this case a lack of action. That's why DOJ and a lot of others would like to see MS's monopoly broken. Joe > >etc. > >Kai > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Doug Yowza [mailto:yowza@yowza.com] >Sent: Thursday, May 21, 1998 5:37 PM >To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers >Subject: RE: cat Xerox | Apple | Microsoft ? > > >On Thu, 21 May 1998, Kai Kaltenbach wrote: > >> We weren't, and aren't, Orwellian characters, >> just folks trying to write software that people want to buy. Gee, I guess >> it worked! So sue us! > >I think one reason Microsoft is being sued is that Microsoft software does >not compete on the merits of the software alone. Windows 3.0 was the >first almost barely usable/tolerable version of Windows. I'm not a Mac >fan, but if you look at something like the Amiga and AmigaOS from 1985, it >was such a clearly better operating system and windowing system PC >environment compared to Microsoft's offering that if Microsoft had to >compete on technical merit alone, they would have been out of business >weeks after the Amiga's introduction. > >To suggest that Microsoft's success is due to writing software that people >*want* to buy is disingenuous. Microsoft's success is due solely to the >monopoly IBM gave them in 1982. To their credit, Microsoft is only about >five years behind the curve. If IBM had kept the monopoly to themselves, >we'd all be closer to ten years behind the curve. > >-- Doug > >

28 years, 3 months

IBM PC DOS 1.00, anybody???

by desieh＠southcom.com.au

-----Original Message----- From: Uncle Roger <sinasohn(a)ricochet.net> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Friday, 22 May 1998 3:18 Subject: Re: IBM PC DOS 1.00, anybody??? >At 10:17 PM 5/19/98 -0400, you wrote: >>> anybody have IBM PC DOS 1.00? or know of where I may d/l it from the net >>> somewhere?? >> >>Lad, we don't do that here. Copyright situation. Besides, PC-DOS 1.0 > >I don't know for sure, but knowing M$, I strongly suspect that they still >retain the rights to it as a commercial product (and all versions since), >unlike Apple, which makes the 6.0.x and 7.0 versions of the MacOS available >for free from their FTP site. > >Perhaps the original poster was thinking that M$ might be so gracious as to >do as Apple did? (Woooheee.... Boy, I crack myself up sometimes... 8^) > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- O- > >Uncle Roger "There is pleasure pure in being mad >roger(a)sinasohn.com that none but madmen know." >Roger Louis Sinasohn & Associates >San Francisco, California http://www.sinasohn.com/ > well there was talk at sometime that Microsoft was going to make DOS shareware......... dont know what evunated out of it but isnt Win 98 the last OS to have MS-DOS?? so whenever they release a next OS that would be the time they make DOS shareware......... this is probably so they dont have to support it anymore........

28 years, 3 months

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

test-drb